mjoseph at terminal.cz
Tue Feb 2 18:54:41 EST 1999
After I wrote:
>"Keil & Delitzsch call this a "dignified singular suffix." We both
>know that it is a 3rd person masculine *singular* suffix attaching to
>a *plural* noun,..."
Peter Kirk responded:
>Who is the "we" here? "Keil, Delitzsch and I"? If so, OK, though for
>"know" you really should say "think" or "assert". Or "you and I"? If
>so, certainly not, this is precisely what I am questioning, in that
>the Westminster database gives the suffix as 3rd masculine plural,
>which is normal for the -MOW ending.
Sorry, I wasn't trying to upset you. It was an honest question about
nomenclature; I thought you, I or the database might be using "plural" to
refer to the possessor, rather than the number of the suffix. I would
point out, though, that if the ending is plural, it is interesting that
no one has ever translated it "their faces."
>The list you give seems to be of
>occurrences of the -MOW ending which are said to be singular rather
>than plural; I have just found PFN"YMOW in Psalm 11:7 in the list of
>such occurrences in GKC's footnote 3 at 103f.
The list is from K & D. I figured they meant that the -MOW ending is
always (or almost always) singular. I don't have GKC; if you would be so
kind as to list the passages in which the -MOW ending is clearly plural,
I'd appreciate it greatly.
Better still, if someone with an electornic concordance could list all
the occurrences of the -MOW ending, we could figure it out for ourselves.
>So what do we believe? The 1998 scholarship of the Westminster
>database or the 1867 scholarship of Delitzsch? Which is better, the
>old or the new?
See my sig file.
>What do more recent commentators say? P.C. Craigie
>(Word Biblical Commentary) translates "The upright shall see his face"
>without grammatical comment, and the UBS Handbook by Bratcher and
>Reyburn assumes the same reading without comment. Can anyone find more
>recent discussion of this odd grammar?
I don't have anything available.
There are two kinds of fools:
The first says, "This is old, therefore it is good."
The other says, "This is new, therefore it is better."
More information about the b-hebrew